HC Deb 20 April 1999 vol 329 cc690-2
10. Mrs. Ann Cryer (Keighley)

If he will make a statement on the declaration on the middle east peace process at the Berlin European Council. [79954]

12. Mr. Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow)

What assessment he has made of the current situation regarding the middle east peace process. [79956]

16. Mr. Ernie Ross (Dundee, West)

If he will make a statement on progress with the middle east peace process. [79960]

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Tony Lloyd)

The United Kingdom played a leading and positive role in negotiating the text of the European Union declaration on the middle east peace process which issued from the Berlin European Council on 24 and 25 March. The declaration signals to the parties the importance that the European Union attaches to a negotiated settlement.

Together with our EU partners, we remain concerned about the continuing deadlock in the middle east peace process and will seek renewed progress, including progress on Wye implementation, after the Israeli elections, whatever Government emerge from those elections.

Mrs. Cryer

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the UK's contribution to the Berlin declaration on the middle east peace process, and thank him for his constructive comments. Will he give an assurance that, in the months to come, we shall not lose sight of that declaration, particularly its penultimate paragraph which, with Madam Speaker's permission, I shall quote? It says that the creation of a democratic, viable and peaceful sovereign Palestinian State on the basis of existing agreements and through negotiations would be the best guarantee of Israel's security and Israel's acceptance as an equal partner in the region.

Mr. Lloyd

I thank my hon. Friend for her opening remarks. Let me make it clear that the United Kingdom, as one of the major parties that worked for the declaration at Berlin, is obviously very much committed to all the sentiments expressed. Certainly, we want a return to a negotiating framework in which the problems between Israel and the Palestine National Authority can be resolved and brought to a satisfactory conclusion. Obviously, within that, although the declaration is deliberately non-prescriptive, it certainly refers to the right of the Palestinians to self-determination, including the option of a state.

Mr. Gerrard

I welcome my hon. Friend's reply to the question about support for the Palestinian right to self-determination, but specifically in respect of Jerusalem, will he confirm that it is still the Government's view that there is no Israeli sovereignty over either east or west Jerusalem, and that the final status of Jerusalem remains open to negotiation as part of the final settlement?

Mr. Lloyd

Yes, I can confirm that the status of Jerusalem is roughly as my hon. Friend set out to the House. We recognise, of course, the de facto control of Israel over west Jerusalem, but we consider east Jerusalem to be under illegal military occupation. In that context, we do not recognise any de jure sovereignty over the city. The status of Jerusalem has to be determined in the final status talks. We hold that position to be binding on all parties.

Mr. Ross

Will my hon. Friend join me in condemning the recent burst of settlement activity on the west bank and in Gaza, which has been particularly encouraged by the present Israeli Government? Will he comment on US satellite information which suggests that 25 per cent. of existing settlements are uninhabited? Does that not clearly show that the land grab has more to do with affecting the final settlement processes contained in the Oslo accord than with the need for homes?

Mr. Lloyd

I am not in a position to comment on those particular reports. The Berlin declaration calls on all parties to refrain from unilateral actions, which of course include settlement activity. If my hon. Friend is right and some settlements remain unoccupied, that would at least encourage the view that it is possible for the Israeli Government to accept that it is in their own interests now to move forward on the basis that those unilateral actions of further settlement should be avoided. The necessity now is for whichever Government emerge from the coming election to recommit themselves to the negotiating process.

Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet)

Some months ago, the Israeli Government offered to reduce any military presence that they may have in southern Lebanon if there was an equivalent response from the Syrian Government. Has any progress been made in that regard, or is there any prospect of progress, because surely, demilitarisation of Lebanon would be an important piece in the jigsaw in realising a durable and fair peace settlement in the middle east?

Mr. Lloyd

Of course, existing Security Council resolutions make it clear that southern Lebanon should be vacated by outside military forces. That must remain the position of the British Government. Clearly, we look to the election in Israel to produce a Government who will recommit themselves to a comprehensive package which will include not only southern Lebanon, but negotiations with Syria in respect of the Golan heights.

Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park)

Further to the question before last, given that the settlement policy is against international law, what representations are the Government making directly to the Israeli Government on this subject?

Mr. Lloyd

The Berlin declaration openly calls for all parties to avoid unilateral actions that could damage the peace process, and it is clear that among those actions would be the continuation of settlement activity. That has been a long-standing demand, not only of this Government, but of the European Union. The Israeli Government, whichever parties they emerge from, can be in no doubt of the position of the international community in the European Union, including Britain, on that issue.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

Does the hon. Gentleman, pursuant to those answers, agree that— especially in light of the admirable Berlin declaration—the continuing behaviour of the Israeli Government in pushing ahead with what are, and are known to be, illegal settlements puts the Israeli Government beyond the pale? After the election, will the Foreign Secretary see to it that there is convened in London a European conference to decide how Europe should move ahead in light of the new elections—perhaps decoupling ourselves slightly from the American process, which has been dismally unsuccessful in the middle east—and promote a European initiative to bring about progress in the middle east, to lead us out of the current impasse?

Mr. Lloyd

I make it clear to the House and to the hon. Gentleman that the Berlin declaration was published when it was in order to ensure that both Palestinians and Israelis were in no doubt about the views of people here in Europe. Those views certainly contained a clear warning against any unilateral actions, and, as I have told the House, the continuation of an illegal settlements policy would be such a unilateral action.

We await the election. We hope that the new Government will commit themselves, and we urge any Government in Israel to recommit themselves, to a negotiated process, because a return to the Wye declaration and the spirit thereof is the only way forward, not simply for the Palestinians but for the people of Israel.

Back to